Page 26 THE EVERETT ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, MARCH 11, 2022 DPH updates COVID-19 death definition Revised data capture more accurately the acute impact of COVID-19 in the Commonwealth B eginning on Monday, March 14, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) will update the criteria used for identifying COVID-19 deaths to align with guidance from the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. Currently, the COVID-19 death definition includes anyone who has COVID-19 listed as a cause of death on their death certificate, and any individual who has had a COVID-19 diagnosis within 60 days but does not have COVID-19 listed as a cause of death on their death certificate. The updated definition reduces this timeframe from 60 days to 30 days for individuals without a COVID-19 diagnosis on their death certificate. The revision follows the recommendation of the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE), in collaboration with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to create a standardized approach for states to use for counting COVID-19 ~ LEGAL NOTICE ~ CITY OF EVERETT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 484 BROADWAY, ROOM 24 EVERETT, MASSACHUSETTS 02149 617-394-2498 To Whom It May Concern: This notice is to inform you that a public hearing will be held on Monday, March 21, 2022 at 6:00 PM, Everett City Hall, 3rd Floor George Keverian Hearing Room. All interested parties may attend and opinions will be heard regarding the following petition. Whereas a petition has been presented by: Property Address: 403 Main Street Map/Lot: D0-01-000026 Person Requesting: Alfred J. Lattanzi 57 Peirce Avenue Everett, MA 02149 PROPOSAL: Applicant seeks to build three additional stories on and around the existing two buildings on this 8317 Square foot lot that exists in the Business Zoning District. The building will contain a mixed use that will include sixteen residential units and two commercial units. The existing buildings are currently non-conforming and the applicant will require a Special Permit and a determination from the board that by extending his non-conforming condition on the front and side offsets that this will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. In the rear of the property the new building will require relief in the form of a variance for the set back of six (6) feet four (4) inches. The F.A.R. for this project will be at 3.2. Reason for Denial: Permit was denied in accordance to the City of Everett Zoning Ordinance Appendix A as follows: 1. Appendix A section (6) (B) (2) - Lot Area: All other Uses---2 to 1 maximum floor area. The proposed plan includes a floor area ratio of 3.2 to 1. (variance) 2. Appendix A section (6) (B). (6) Rear Yard: Twenty-five (25) feet minimum unless the lot extends from one (1) street to another street, in which case no rear yard is required, except for any residential use which shall require a ten-foot minimum. (Ord. of 6-29-87) (variance) 3. Appendix A section (6) (B). (4) - Front Yard: (Conforming for the current use) Requires the minimum of 10’ setback for residential uses. The building is currently at the property line. (Variance Required) 4. Appendix A section (6). (B). Side Yard: (8) Corner Lot: (Existing Non- Conforming) None Required except seven (7) feet when residential use. (Ord. of 6-29-87). The building is currently at the property lines. (Special Permit Required) 5. Appendix A Section 3 General Requirements (C): which states the following: “Existing non-conforming structure or uses may be extended or altered, provided that such extension, alteration or change of use shall be permitted only upon the grant of a Special Permit by the zoning board of appeals after a public hearing and a finding by the board that such extension, alteration or change of use shall not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming use or structure. The applicant is requesting Relief from the City of Everett Zoning Board of Appeals for a Use Variance to make this a Mixed-Use Building. Parking will be completed through the TDM Mary Gerace - Chairman Roberta Suppa - Clerk Board of Appeals March 4 & 11, 2022 deaths. Several other states are adopting this definition. Massachusetts has applied this new definition retroactively to the start of the pandemic in March 2020. As a result, 4,081 deaths in Massachusetts that were previously counted as associated with COVID-19 will be removed. In addition, approximately 400 deaths not previously counted but identified through a manual process of matching death certificates with medical records will be added to the COVID-19 death count. The state’s overall COVI.-19 death count, therefore, will decline by 3,700. “We are adopting the new definition because we support the need to standardize the way COVID-19-associated deaths are counted,” said DPH State Epidemiologist Dr. Catherine Brown. “Prior to the CSTE definition, states did not have a nationally recommended definition for COVID-19 deaths and, as such, have been using a variety of processes and definitions to count their deaths. In Massachusetts, our definition has consistently been broader than most other states. After a deep dive into our data and reviewing thousands of death certificates we recognize that this updated definition gives us a truer picture of mortality associated with COVID-19.” “It is important to understand that we cannot identify all COVID-19 deaths with 100 percent accuracy,” said Nicolas Menzies, associate professor of Global Health at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “The revised definition for COVID-19 deaths is a reasonable balance between sensitivity and specificity and will make it easier to compare Massachusetts death data with data from other jurisdictions.” “Updating this important metric is a necessary step to help us better gauge the current severity of the pandemic and its impact on our health system and society as a whole,” said Dr. Helen Boucher, interim dean of Tufts University School of Medicine. “The ability to be nimble and quickly adapt to changing circumstances demonstrates Massachusetts’ continued leadership in COVID-19 data reporting and analysis.” Early in the pandemic, and absent clear national guidance, DPH matched COVID-19 surveillance case information with death certificates to identify deaths in people who tested positive for the virus but did not have COVID-19 listed as a cause of death. To avoid the possibility of missing any COVID-19-asCOVID-19 | SEE PAGE 27
27 Publizr Home